Lewis v. Libby, Mcneill & Libby

113 F.Supp. 272 (1953)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P's trap and the partially constructed trap of D are located on the eastern shore of Cook Inlet. D has maintained and operated a trap on the identical site for 25 years. It is an integral part of its cannery, without which the operation of that enterprise would not be profitable. P jumped the site. There is no property right in a trap site. The right of an occupant to reoccupy a chosen site has been recognized by custom. Without this custom strife and violence will inevitably occur. D has maintained a cabin for its trap watchman and a tailhold for its trap on the abutting upland. In 1945 P included this area comprising four acres in his homestead entry. D's protest of June 24, 1946, against the inclusion of this area, was, on April 30, 1951, dismissed by the Bureau of Land Management. D's application under the soldiers' additional homestead provisions of the law for this tract was rejected. On January 31, 1952, D filed an adverse claim and in support thereof filed suit in this court on March 28, 1952. The patent was issued to P on May 8, 1952. During the entire period, P and D were in negotiations. D acted reasonably and in good faith. P responded in kind until he got his patent. P demanded that the D purchase the area from $750 to $1,000 an acre. P then demanded an annual rent of $5000. P admitted that the value of the land was not in excess of $200 an acre. On April 4, 1953, P commenced the construction of a hand trap, on D's site. On April 22 D notified P of its intention to reoccupy the site. On April 30 P completed the trap structure, and all that remained to be done to put the trap into operating condition by hanging netting and webbing, which, is not ordinarily hung until just before the opening day of the season. On May 20, D commenced driving piling at the seaward end for its trap. This would cut through P's structure or its lateral supports and either partially destroy it or render it ineffective. The installation of a trap within 2500 feet laterally of another trap is prohibited by law. P seeks injunctive relief.